Analysis 1: Fabrication of Structural Steel Members
A huge issue throughout the construction of Steel City High-Rise was the fabrication of structural steel members lagging the erection crew. With the winter months being
unpredictable in western Pennsylvania, Turner Construction Company was looking for opportunities to fast-track the beginning of the project to either complete the project
ahead of schedule or to provide a cushion if inclement winter weather were to delay the steel erection. In theory and partially in practice the plan was wise and running smoothly
up until it was time for steel to begin. The foundations, site work and utilities, and masonry ended up finishing over a month ahead of schedule; however, the steel fabrication
process was too far behind for the structural erection to be able to capitalize on the schedule acceleration.
Analysis 2: Unique Structural Elements
Another area that served as a complication and potential issue pertained to the diverse members throughout the structure. With the exception of the office portion (the top six
floors), typical, repetitious bays did not exist in the building. With 18 stories and 3,300 significant steel members, having a large number of unique members can slow down both
the design process as well as the fabrication, detailing, and erection of the members as well.
Analysis 3: Collocation
The on-site offices for the Steel City High-Rise are located in a building that is adjacent to the site footprint. The offices house all of the project team that is currently working,
with the exception of the structural engineer and the architect. The architect attends biweekly OAC meetings and the structural engineer phones into subcontractor and OAC
meetings sporadically approximately 2 times a month. The construction industry is largely interest in the benefits, consequences, and reality of implementing collocation to a
project to see if it actually does benefit the team and project as a whole.
Analysis 4: Vertical MEP
The majority of the MEP for this project is within the hotel portion of the building, it is nearly all running vertically.
The reason for this is because all of the floor plans for each level of the hotel are identical, so the bathrooms and areas requiring MEP are stacked upon each other. This is an
extremely efficient way to construct the MEP systems; however, the work is currently scheduled to occur after the structure is completed and is set to be installed one floor at a time.
A structural breadth will be performed in order to evaluate whether or not having a typical bay system in the structure would prove to be beneficial to the structural system and to
the project as a whole. Currently, it seems as though the varying structure could be increasing the cost, the fabrication and design process, the erection, and the project schedule
as a whole. A bay will be designed that is intended to preserve the performance of the structure, while accelerating the design, fabrication, and erection of the steel. The material
and labor costs, as well as the schedule reduction or escalation will be evaluated. In order to evaluate whether or not this change will be for the better I will research why the
system was designed as it currently is, how the schedule can be reduced for both erection and fabrication if there were more repetitious members, compare the submittal process
for typical floor plans versus unique floorplans, and I will compare the erection crews productivity for redundant vs unique members and bays. I expect that creating uniform bays
more often throughout the structure will reduce the cost and schedule of the project as a whole.
A mechanical breadth will be performed in order to evaluate whether or not rooftop air handling units are the best systems for the building. Currently, the structure has an interior
space that was to have a pool, but the owner has since decided to eliminate the pool due to the heating in maintenance costs to have a pool in Pittsburgh. This space has been
considered for a larger fitness center (expanding on the existing one) or as a conference space for the hotel food services staff. I plan to evaluate using this space for interior air
handling units that can replace the rooftop units. In order to determine whether or not this would be a beneficial change to the design, I will be evaluating the upfront costs versus
the lifecycle costs and lifespan of the equipment. I will also need to make be evaluating the service and maintenance of interior units versus rooftop units, provided that the interior
space is designed to bear the load of the units. I expect that interior air handling units will be a higher initial cost, but will be easier to maintain and will exceed the life of the
|AE Computer Labs|
|The Pennsylvania State University|